Ministers should be entitled to appoint their own private office of hand-picked aides from both in and outside the civil service, Francis Maude, the Cabinet Office minister said, as he claimed Whitehall was still gripped by "a bias to inertia".

Maude also proposed in a speech that civil servants should only be presumed to be in post for four years, saying he did not understand why Whitehall "had the same hierarchal system where some senior people seem to have a job for life regardless of their performance".

Maude also again expressed his anger at the way in which some civil servants avoid argument with their ministers and sometimes simply do not implement ministerial decisions.

Speaking at Policy Exchange thinktank, he also questioned whether the old model of departments as freestanding entities is still sustainable, asking whether a unified operating system would be better.

Maude also rejected calls for a fundamental review of the civil service – for instance through a royal commission – saying it would only serve to delay reform for a further two years.

He also reiterated his call for ministers to be entitled to appoint permanent secretaries from a choice of candidates handed to them by a selection panel.

In his major new proposal he called for ministers to be served by their own appointed French-style cabinet, saying ministers are less well supported in the UK than in many other comparable countries.

He said the scale of support given to ministers matters since they only have "small teams chasing progress and pulling the levers on policy".

He added: "Many of the Labour former ministers who have spoken out on civil service reform have called for greater direct support for ministers. This is not about more political advisers.

"But it could be about being able to bring in from outside people of experience and ability. These may be found beyond Whitehall but they can just as easily be career civil servants.

"What they must be is personally responsible to and chosen by the minister – that's the key to sharpening accountability."

He complained that the civil service reform action plan published last year has not led to the transformative change he had hoped for.

He told his audience: "The fact remains that things that should have been done haven't happened. Other projects have been delayed or are only just starting.

"Ask any civil servant – has the civil service really reformed in the last year? I doubt many would say they've seen that much evidence of it.

"Why? Well one issue was that it took far too long to get in place a serious team working on civil service reform.

"Indeed, a serious problem with the civil service is getting the right people with the right skills in place quickly.

"But another part of the reason is classic Catch 22: the things that need reform are exactly the things that make reform difficult. Such as the capability gap, the excessive bureaucracy, the lack of responsiveness to government priorities, poor accountability, policy being designed without reference to its implementation. These are all ingrained, cultural problems that are hard to root out."